Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

A11 Bionic Chip in iPhone 8 and iPhone X on Par With 13-Inch MacBook Pro, Outperforms iPad Pro

anticipate said:
iOS is a subset of MacOS. They're not that far apart. Take the A11 chip, triple the amount of cores, up the speed significantly, and add in another GPU and you easily could have desktop class performance*. You have much more cooling to deal with and more power, so it's not a stretch. And while I am not a coder, I imagine that many apps could be ported from Intel to A11 with a click of a button in xcode.

They're not there yet, but could be with a desktop version of this chip. A11x? A11xx? 12 or 24 (6/6 - 12/12) cores + 12 GPU cores running at 3GHz with active cooling? Why not?

* Desktop as in Core i7/9
Click to expand...

Because you can just put an AMD threadripper at a fraction of the cost - like tomorrow. And we all already know what happens when you get stuck using a desktop class RISC CPU nobody else gives a crap about.

For what? Sell yourself 4million CPUs a quarter?
 
  • Like
Reactions: potassium404, IG88 and Rob_2811
mozumder said:
That's amazing. And that's with a 2 watt power budget of a phone cpu.

If they actually gave it a 25 watt power budget for a laptop or a 150 watt power budget for a desktop, it would destroy anything by any other manufacturer.
[doublepost=1505339836][/doublepost]

geek bench is actually based on real world applications, like gzip and tools. It's a valid comparison for "how much work can this CPU do".
Click to expand...


I may be wrong on the coding aspects but that's what I'm saying. Much more power/cooling = increased clocks and ability to cool a much larger chip. It would be FAST.
 
I need my MBP to be that faster not my phone (when Apple will put effort on making the MacBooks significantly faster is the question) :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: robeddie
a.gomez said:
Because you can just put an AMD threadripper at a fraction of the cost - like tomorrow. And we all already know what happens when you get stuck using a desktop class RISC CPU nobody else gives a crap about.
Click to expand...

This is Apple we're talking about... I don't expect this to happen anytime soon but it's pretty safe bet I think that it's on the road, at least for (some?) of their laptops.
 
Rocketman said:
Rather than expecting an Intel killer, I expect a dual A12 phone. I wonder how long till Apple deprecates the laptop and sticks with an iPhone as a headless mode device airplay to a 4K TV, wireless headphone and keyboard. We are right there now.
Click to expand...
This is the real target - one device that just hooks into screens. That will work for a huge group of people. Not people with serious software needs - but a surprising amount.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robotech
MrX8503 said:
So we shouldn't advance hardware? The hardware has to come first before the software. What's your point?
Click to expand...

If you are gonna advance hardware. Please have some rightful use cases for the advancement. Apple does not. Opening a app a millisecond faster or editing a video a few seconds faster doesn't cut it. AR will remain a gimmick for the next few years so that's neglible as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: potassium404
cppguy said:
Are you serious? It's a tiny pocket device with no fans. It'll never catch up with a laptop, let alone a desktop computer. It may feel as fluid, but it doesn't mean it's as fast. It has much fewer pixels to drive to begin with. My iMac drives 14.6 million pixels, a phone is usually 1080 at best.
Click to expand...

The original comparison was iPhone X to 13" MBP. That is 2.7 million pixels compared to 4 million. 1.5 times as many pixels is not as different as your comparison.

Of course there are many other differences, such as OS, so it is difficult to give a true comparison, but the A11 is probably flattered by these tests.

However, I do wonder what Apple could do with their chips if designed make use of the higher thermal and power capacities of computers. Maybe an Apple ARM chip is realistic for macOS performance wise. But it's implementation would have to be something special to meet the needs currently supported.
 
thomasthegps said:
Well it depends on how the benchmark is designed. If they use the same tests on both I don't see why it's useless. People compare performance across architecture all the time. Nothing new, and yes these benchmarks are meaningful.
Click to expand...
And it wouldn't make much sense to compare a plattform with itself. You've got to run tests on different hardware and software or else the score will always be the same. From personal experience, if Geekbench says a machine is way faster, then it is always noticeable. Not once have I thought, this device has a lower Geeckbench score, but it actually feels faster.
 
At least the Samsung S8 is shipping. Why is Apple always so late to the game? Always behind

I wanted to upgrade my iPhone 4, but there is no way I will wait until November. Screw that. I may use this delay to switch to Android
 
jamesrick80 said:
If you are gonna advance hardware. Please have some rightful use cases for the advancement. Apple does not. Opening a app a millisecond faster or editing a video a few seconds faster doesn't cut it. AR will remain a gimmick for the next few years so that's neglible as well.
Click to expand...

Is that why AR on Android phones lag like crazy? It's not just about opening apps. Editing videos on iPhone is a lot faster too. The A9 is fast, but Apple shouldn't feel comfortable. They should be smashing it every year regardless.

jamesrick80 said:
Apple never took advantage of the A9 by all accounts so it's just a publicity stunt if you think about it.
Click to expand...
Took advantage of it enough for me to not get an Android. The lag on Android is horrendous.
 
Rocketman said:
Rather than expecting an Intel killer, I expect a dual A12 phone. I wonder how long till Apple deprecates the laptop and sticks with an iPhone as a headless mode device airplay to a 4K TV, wireless headphone and keyboard. We are right there now.
Click to expand...

The note 8/S8/S8 plus (DeX) already do this and they are not even running a A11. Chromebooks even use arm chips to run a full desktop OS. We are already there.
[doublepost=1505340811][/doublepost]
MrX8503 said:
Is that why AR on Android phones lag like crazy? It's not just about opening apps. Editing videos on iPhone is a lot faster too. The A9 is fast, but Apple shouldn't feel comfortable. They should be smashing it every year regardless.


Took advantage of it enough for me to not get an Android. The lag on Android is horrendous.
Click to expand...

High end Android phones lag as much as any iPhone...rarely.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: potassium404 and macfacts
FactVsOpinion said:
You prefer names like, ice cream sandwich?
Click to expand...

I mean do some actually think that if their design looks like crap... Pointing out somebody else design - that also looks like crap - makes theirs somehow Ok.

Nop, Ice cream sandwich is what the kid eats in the scene where Cpt Whatever fixes the space station's Bionic Neural processor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mkeeley
MrX8503 said:
Maybe not to you, but to many people it is. It's easy and quick to retouch a photo or recut a video on iOS. I'd imagine many people do this.



I think I've heard that for 5 years now.
Click to expand...

The point being, for the tasks you listed (except maybe AR) even the A8 chip is overkill.
 
Apple Arm based macbooks coming soon and I'm looking forward to it as long as they pass some of the savings to us consumers.

I'm sure macbook pros will continue to use intel chips.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back